“Every question I answer will lead to another.”“What’s dead?” “Something you will never have to worry about.”
“We are here for a reason.”
“Life... death... rebirth... it’s the source. The heart of the island.”
Whoa... uh... whoa. Um. Hm. How do I find words for that episode??
My husband and I just had a brief chat following the ep about whether an episode like this one, that reveals a lot of answers, is something I write more about or less? Or is it something where I just state the answers and say, “Cool, speculation on THAT one is over” slap hands together “looking forward to next week!”
I really enjoyed this episode. I didn’t find it to be quite the epic story that “Ab Aeterno” was, and there were actually a couple of scenes I thought dragged a wee bit, but we saw SO much of the island origins in this one... this is the one where, if you were to show a non-Lost fan, you’d pretty much ruin the entire series for them. Let’s not make this one the one we try to recruit new fans with, OK?
I’ve said it since season 1: The dominant theme of this show is black and white. And when you mix the two, you get grey. I think this episode finally showed us sympathy for the Man in Black, but also for Jacob. Neither one is good, neither is evil.
Answers:
• Jacob and “Jacob’s Brother” are... brothers.
• Smokey wasn't lying when he told Kate his mom was crazy.
• The kids we saw in the jungle really were the two boys as kids (EVERYONE told me that second one was just an older Jacob when I said it was probably the Boy in Black).
• The Frozen Donkey Wheel was somehow constructed by Smokey (since he didn’t actually make it before Brother died) as a way of getting off the island, but he couldn’t use it for some reason.
• The source of immortality seems to be in the wine that Mom gives to Jacob, the same wine that he gives to Richard Alpert. The same wine bottle that Smokey smashed.
• Smokey was created when Jacob actually killed his brother and turned him into some sort of smokey essence, forever trapped on the island and having an existence worse than death.
• Adam and Eve are Brother and Mom.
• The Man in Black has actually been dead in every scene we’ve seen him in so far... didn’t see THAT coming.
Highlights:
• “Every question I answer will lead to another.” Anyone else feel like that was Damon and Carlton addressing us directly??
• I loved Brother referring to spots on the island where “metal behaves strangely.”
• The
• Mom pulling out the two stones!! I yelled out loud, “OH MY GOD, SHE’S EVE!!” Husband: “Who’s Eve?” Me: “Sigh.”
• The birth of Smokey was pretty frakkin’ awesome.
• Adam and Eve!!! Thankyouthankyouthankyou... though it wasn’t Adam and Eve after all... more Eve and Cain.
Did You Notice?:
• Seeing a pregnant woman crawling out of the ocean immediately brought to mind Rousseau, and made me wonder about any possible connections. Just as this woman comes to the island and gives birth, Rousseau comes to the island and does the same. Smokey kills the rest of her team, but she is preserved (though driven mad by the circumstances). The baby goes over to the Others, and is ultimately killed. You’d think Smokey would do anything he could to preserve the one baby who arrived on the island – from across the sea, like him.
• The woman was wearing a red dress. Is that some old-fashioned, female version of a red ensign shirt? Same end result.
• And then CJ from The West Wing comes running out!!! I half-expected her to hold a press conference about the ship crash, carefully averting questions that might hurt her reputation in important political circles.
• When Island CJ first shows up, you can hear the whispers.
• The mother’s name is “Claudia,” which actually means lame or disabled in Latin.
• The other brother (who remains UNNAMED, like Claudia only had one name and Island CJ didn’t know what “names” were so she went with “Jacob” as the one name and “your brother” as the other) was hairy, compared to Jacob. At that moment I was convinced they were going to say his name was Esau.
• There was a subtle nod to history repeating itself. Island CJ delivers Claudia’s babies, and then takes them from her. Kate delivers Claire’s baby, and then raises him. CJ uses herbs and plants a garden the same way Sun did.
• Right from the beginning, the distinction between the brothers seems to be that Jacob is content with his lot in life, where the Bruthah in Black is the guy who believes there’s something else out there and longs to see it. He’s the ambitious one.
• Anyone else think “Two players, two sides, one white, one black” when the boys began playing their game?? It also made me wonder if my season 6 cover should be a black stone and a white stone instead...
• The "So... do you want to play or don't you, Jacob?" certainly set up the idea of the island as a colossal game between two big players. Later, the "One day you can make up your own game and everyone else will have to follow your rules" was pretty awesome, too. The number of times they showed these two playing a game certainly made our poor Oceanic survivors look like nothing more than pawns.
• The boy wants to know if there’s somewhere else across the sea. The term “Across the Sea” was repeated throughout (and not just to drive home the title) which immediately brought to mind that season 1 episode where Shannon sat on the beach and sang “La Mer,” the French version of the song “Beyond the Sea” that she always heard in Finding Nemo. The song has been referenced a couple of times, but that was the most obvious one. Did she become a target when she sang that?
• “You are special.” So the Bruthah in Black is referred to the same way as John Locke and Walt. Smokey originally looked like Bruthah, then John Locke, but Walt is also tied into both of them through Shannon (who sang “La Mer”) and appearing to John Locke.
• Anyone else have Xena flashbacks when they saw the getups of the men killing the boar?
• Island Mama says, “They come, they fight, they destroy, they corrupt, and it always ends the same,” which is what the Man in Black said in “The Incident” when sitting on the beach with Jacob. Interesting that he would quote the woman who destroyed his life, in a sense.
• Brother can see dead people... which now links him to Hurley. Is Hurley special, too? Would Miles count in that category? (He doesn’t see them, but talks to them.)
• Brother leaves Mom and Jacob chooses to stay with her. Being on the island seems to always be about choosing sides, whether, in season 1, you stayed with Sayid on the beach or went to the caves with Jack, or followed Jack in season 4 or Locke, or choose to do Jacob’s bidding or the Man in Black’s in season 6... it’s always about sides. Alpert was torn between the two sides when he first came, too. Again, it pulls in the metaphor of this show of black and white, good and evil, and the choices we make on a daily basis to do good or succumb to temptations.
• Island CJ tells Jacob, “I needed you to stay good.” She convinces him in this scene that he’s the good guy... does that make him the good guy? Contrast this scene on a log on the beach with the previous one with the Brother in Black... in that scene she tells him how special he is. Allison Janney plays the role beautifully... you can really see the contrast in the way she looks at the two boys, and can tell that she really does have a preference for the Brother.
• I often heard the whispers whenever the camera would flash by the mother.
• The dagger that Brother throws is the same one Dogen had, and the same one he asked Alpert to kill Jacob with.
• Brother seems angry after spending 30 years with the people (who are distinguished from themselves as being greedy and manipulative and selfish, as if Jacob and Brother don’t possess those faults as well) and Jacob seems to inhabit goodness, but only in his naivety.
• When I saw Brother stoking the charcoal in the fire, I was a little worried there would be a Peter Parker-type of incident where he’d be thrown in the fire and emerge a... smoke monster. (Nope, that was to come a little later!!)
• When Mama and Jacob go to the light in the cave at night, it seems much dimmer than it had been in the day, as if the light is going out because of her becoming tired.
• Jacob had used the wine bottle as the metaphor of the island... in the scene where he drinks from it, she uncorks the wine bottle, giving us the insinuation she’s actually doing something bad here, and not good, in the context of Jacob’s speech in “Ab Aeterno.”
• Jacob wants to stay on the island, and Brother wants to leave. What a strange island that the smokey essence of Brother now looks like Locke, the one person who did not want to leave the island.
• “There’s a storm coming.” “Yes there is.” And the award for Line with Most Obvious Use of Foreshadowey Symbolism goes to...
• Did anyone else think, when Brother stood among the burning huts gritting his teeth, “And THAT, kids, is how Anakin became Darth Vader!”
• I thought the dying tilt of Mom’s head was a little forced. “Thank you...” YOINK to the immediate right. It seemed like a death scene I’d watch in a high school play.
• Seeing Brother lying in the water reminded me of when Boone found Shannon in the water in “Hearts and Minds.”
• So I remember back when Jack found the bodies in the cave, he said by the state of decomposition the bodies had been dead for 50 or 60 years. Um... either he TOTALLY sucked in autopsy class or the bodies decomposed at such a slow rate because of the healing properties of the island, or because she was ageless. But HE wasn’t ageless, so...
• I think I’m kind of in love with Titus Welliver.
So Many Questions...
• Jacob only calls him “Brother,” making him sound an awful lot like a certain Scot on the island. Could that be a link to Desmond?
• At this point I’m assuming this section won’t be answered if it’s minor... but what happened to Island CJ’s mother? She said, “She’s dead” and I wonder if she killed her somehow? Does the cycle just continue? Was she ageless like CJ and Jacob?
• How did the boys possibly not notice another tribe on the island for 13 years? Not sure I buy that one.
• So what exactly is the light in the cave? It looks beautiful, she says it’s the warmest, brightest light you’ve ever seen, but no one must ever find it. She says a little bit of that light is inside every man, but they always want more. So what is it? Goodness? Evil? Testosterone? It sounds like it’s good, but then look what it does at the end? And how would it be able to get them off the island via the Frozen Donkey Wheel Express? Mom says if the light goes out here, it goes out everywhere, and they have to preserve it, which would suggest it’s a good thing...? Will it be explained, or will it be like the glow in the briefcase that Vincent Vega opens in Pulp Fiction? Or in the trunk in Repo Man?
• How old is the mother? She doesn’t age physically, but I wonder how many years? -- decades? centuries? -- she was there before the boys arrived?
• OK, gaming experts: Is that a real game that Jacob and his brother are playing? Is it a primitive form of chess? Checkers? Go?
• If being near the light does something to you worse than death, then when Brother lets the beam of light into the room, why doesn’t anything happen? How did having that light travel through Ben and Locke change them in some way when they jumped off the island via FDW Express?
• How did the donkey wheel end up frozen?
• So... did Smokey then take the form of the dead Brother and that’s what we saw in “The Incident” talking to Jacob and “Ab Aeterno” talking to Richard? If he’s dead, why is he still longing to leave the island? In what form could he do that?
• The synopsis for this episode on my PVR was, “John Locke’s motives are finally revealed.” Really? That makes it sound obvious. So... his motives for killing all those people is to get off the island and... wait, we already knew that LAST week. How did this episode clarify any of that?
Me tomorrow:
I’m on Facebook! Come and find me. I am here. :)
Tomorrow listen in to Marshall and Forbes on The Ocean 98.5 in Victoria, BC at 7:10 a.m. local time, 10:10 a.m. EST. Go here and click on the Listen Now button if you’re out of the listening area.
And tomorrow at noon I will once again be participating in the Globe and Mail Lost chat from noon to 1pm EST. Go here to ask questions and comment. See you there!
And finally, listen to KEX 1190 at 6:20 p.m. PST, 9:20 p.m. EST where I’ll be on the Mark & Dave show (and they’re big Lost fans so it’s always fun). Go here and click the Listen Now button.
Next week:
I joked when they announced “The End” would be the title of the finale, “How long before they start using the Doors’ song in previews?” Apparently... right about now. ;)
430 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 430 of 430@ Gracie: Using the idea of repeated dialogue. BiB/MiB says that "He just wants to go home". This is a copy of what Locke tells Sayer (among others) about his intentions. Is that coincidental or is it indicative of them being the same? FLocke/MIB IS home. This island is the only place he's ever been, and every time I've asked just exactly where is it that this dude wants to go, I have not seen a reply to my inquiry. It indicates to me that he wants to keep his story the same for everyone so as to not trip himself up by lying and getting caught.
I think that MiB has this idealized vision of "Home" being where his mother and co. came from, or wherever it was that he was "supposed" to have grown p. From early on, he intuitively knows that contrary to what Mommie Dearest says, there is something across the sea, and that place is "Home" to him. He is not content with life on the island, and who can blame him? He is totally isolated from others of his own kind (except for Mommie Dearest and Jacob, who would wear on anyone after a while)...and by the time he hooks up with the 'others,' he is about 13 and no doubt starting to wish there was some female company on the island as well! Can you blame the poor kid for constructing an idea of 'Home' somewhere far away, across the sea, with girls and people who might even give him a name, fer gossakes?
re: hope - I can't say that I particularly like this idea. I think it is too simplistic an answer to the power resident in the Source. Largely this is because the world will not vanish, and everyone we know & love will not die without hope. You can live a long, long time without hope. I know this is true because I have done it, and know many other people who have done so and still do. It is a nice thing to have, but not something so large that the lack of it will cause the end of the world as we know it.
I think that the light represents something far more fundamental - something like The Force from Star Wars (an energy that is at the core of all living things, that binds us and contains us, that binds the universe together...) or maybe the well of souls, if you go in for that sort of thing. Now thatcould mess things up in a really big way, if something caused it to somehow be obliterated. Hope? Small potatoes, by comparison.
VW: cations - very small, positively charged particles 2) very small, charged furry animals
VW2: ration - 1)the very small amount of something that you are permitted to have in a given period of time (eg, our weekly allotment of Lost); 2) the abysmal stuff we feed our fine people who serve in our nation's military forces while they are in the field, as though they were not suffering enough already 3) a very small, charged rodent, sometimes eaten by a cation
Nurse Brian and Blam: First Blam: Thanks for the clarification. I DID think you were referring to what I replied to, and in reference to your final comment, I believe you made me suck in my breath as well as give me a good case of the willies. I'm still thinking about that. I don't want to believe MIB was an island manifestation to start with, but I know you may very well be right.
Nurse Brian: I don't want to leave anything open to interpretation regarding Akron, the city of my birth and upbringing (though no longer my home). It is home to the great Akron General Medical Center, surpassed in Ohio only by the Cleveland Clinic. I have been to both, and I'll tell ya, if I have to be hospitalized and it's serious? Take me to AGMC! That's the place to go because the CC really only cares about you if you are the King of Jordan, a politician, or a known actor or singer. You have to have a "name" to get the best service there, and AGMC is just very good. (Sadly, this is just too true.) AGMC is completely up-to-date, and only hire the best in medical personnel. Having said that, I was pregnant in 1990, and had all of my tests there. There were numerous complications, and for reasons too lengthy to go into, they did not want to do an amnio on me. So I ended up having seven ultrasounds. In 1990, with seven ultrasounds, you would think I'd know it was going to be a she-person? We did not. NOBODY did! When Child was born the doctor said, "If she keeps her legs as tightly closed in life as she did in the womb, you will never be a Grandmother." So far, so good. (Being a grandmother is not a deal breaker for me; having a happy, well-adjusted kid, IS.)
Nurse Brian: You can and should study your butt off for your finals. But personally, I think you'll do just fine.
@variabull: The last time I remember seeing the dagger (and we went back to check this, but it was a while ago), Sayid slit Lennon's throat, and sat down (or on his haunches) on the steps. It appeared that he let it fall from his hands after using it on Lennon, and when he is sitting, including when Ben comes to collect him, it is not shown in his hands. I believe this is what Spouse and I determined when we went back to see just where that knife is now. It should be at the bottom of the pool.
Heads Up to anyone who enjoys Cooking Shows or All Things Lost: Dinner Impossible is running a show on cooking for the cast and crew of Lost. I've seen the add, and I think the chef has to cook the Dinner Impossible within the limits of what he might find on the island. I know Richard is on it, as is Hurley (both were shown in the ad). It's scheduled in my area for this coming Wednesday on the FOOD NETWORK. Check your local listings if this interests you at all. It's odd to show this right now from my perspective, because a cooking show is where I first heard about Lost. :o)
Blam: A Womb With A View. That was in fact priceless. Pregnant women everywhere need one of those! And instructions books on what to do with a child when you get one.
Can you explain what TextEdit is, or am I better off Googling that? I know some programs are local things. There's been many I could never find on Google.
Rainier (here they come Rain!): I was thinking last night about what to expect in the way of answers. What I came up with set off a warning light that everyone might want to pay heed to. If you let this thing get to you regarding answers? It most certainly will without wasting any time. And I think there's a very fine line between what they have to give you, and what can be left to the imagination. I say this because if you start thinking in terms of how this story all came about, you'll run into: "Where did mom get her clothing, milk for the newborns, enough food for three, clothing for growing children and grown men, who cut their hair, how do they shave, etc?" And I think it's safe to say that nobody is going to answer those questions. Leaving answers behind also leaves the door ajar for my Number Ten wish for the end of this show: The ability for somebody, someday, at whatever time, to bring it back. At the end of last weeks show, I had such an overload of questions! Now I have exactly three: What is in the light? What is in the island water? What does this mean if both are underwater? From the name of this week's show, I think we might get those answered. Maybe.
Rainier said: "Stabbing: I am with Benny on this one, and want to add that when Ben killed Jacob, he allowed Jacob to speak before stabbing him. Jacob might have opted to say something more persuasive in his own defense rather than simply dismissing Ben as being of no real consequence. It seems clear as a result of this that there no magic in the formula of stabbing without giving the recipient of the dagger any opportunity to speak first; this is, in fact, about persuasion."
Me: I think that Jacob didn't think of "Ben as being of no real consequence". I just don't think Jacob really "thought" of Ben at all. Remember he had ignored and/or showed Ben a lack of respect for all those years. I think it's a big deal that he expected Ben to take care of the island, but did not feel for all those years that Ben was worthy of an audience. This utter lack of respect, IMHO, shows that he thought Ben wasn't to be considered in any way (including friend or foe), and I don't think he really thought that Ben would actually take his life. He more or less just completely disregarded him, which was foolish on his part. But I'm not sure to what extent Jacob's naivete could be taken here: Did he KNOW his life was in danger? Did he even realize what Ben having a knife could mean regarding his own safety? Had he learned anything regarding his own safety in all those years, especially since MIB couldn't kill him? Had anyone else ever tried to kill him? I just don't know. He knew he was in trouble though when FLocke walked in (but what would that mean to him?), so that IS open to interpretation. Maybe he did know he was going to die, but with Hurley there as his guide for his Replacement, he thought he could get out of his "job" on the island, was grateful, and could still work his way towards an end-game.
As far as the talking thing before you kill someone (and sneaking up behind them)? We've been rewatching Lost all day, and at some times now, I'm not even sure who started this, if it's for real, or if it's been information passed on that's actually misguided (maybe on purpose). I really think that Richard should know the answer to this. In other words, it doesn't seem to matter sometimes. Again, I don't know. After listening to both of the podcasts this week (Darlton and Geronimo Jack's Beard), my mind changed or went into a confused state several times.
Rainier said: re: hope - I can't say that I particularly like this idea. I think it is too simplistic an answer to the power resident in the Source. Largely this is because the world will not vanish, and everyone we know & love will not die without hope. You can live a long, long time without hope. I know this is true because I have done it, and know many other people who have done so and still do. It is a nice thing to have, but not something so large that the lack of it will cause the end of the world as we know it.
I more than understand what you're saying here. And the majority of the reason I'm sticking with it, is it's simplicity. But you have to look at it both ways, which I originally did, and then went with "hope". Sure it can be the be-all-and-the-end-all that Mom said it was, or it can be something a little more simplistic like "hope" that people can and do live without, although not very comfortably or happily. I went with the more simple because if in fact this is a world changer or a world ender, we are in deep sh*t. I feel it has to be something that maybe (?) mankind can find again and rebuild on. And I say this for one very simple reason: The island as we know it is underwater now. I don't see any way to bring it back up. Whatever would've been there is underwater with it. And the precious island water is now ocean water. So I went for something more simple. Hope can be lost and found again. And I am having more problems than most of the bloggers (it appears) believing that everything dear old mum said should be written in stone. I find myself questioning EVERYTHING she said because she proved herself to be a liar. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me sort of thing, and I look back at the show for ways to discredit her words. I very much believe in Nikki's idea that "love" is very powerful here, which is a simplistic answer IMHO. But once love is lost, it CAN be found again. Maybe not with the same person, the same intensity, or the same passion, but you can love, and then love again.
@Gracie:I think that Jacob didn't think of "Ben as being of no real consequence". I just don't think Jacob really "thought" of Ben at all.
You've hit on a very important point here. miB says to jacob that people are just means to an end. In other words, con them so you can get your goal, much as Sawyer did in his life.
For so long we've seen Jacob as this good guy. And yet, there is nothing charitable in him. He brings people to the island (no choice on their part), and he lets them figure it out on their own. If they don't, they die. So far they've all died. It's a sort of survival of the fittest; only no one is the fittest.
So which is worse: (a) to be conned by MiB, or (b) to be forced into a no win situation by Jacob?
We used to see these two figures as diametrical opposites: good versus evil. Now we realize their just both indifferent to humanity. One sees humanity close up; the other from a distance.
@Gracie:And I am having more problems than most of the bloggers (it appears) believing that everything dear old mum said should be written in stone. I find myself questioning EVERYTHING she said because she proved herself to be a liar.
Right on! Mother said she would make it the brothers could not harm each other. Now we think maybe Jacob killed his brother (some still believe Smokie possesses MiB's soul).But in a story in which promises are regularly broken, people constantly lie, why should we as the audience believe some character's claims just because she is dressed in 2,000 year old clothes! So far almost nobody has told the truth on this island--so why begin now. And if you want to fall for a con, then just believe what is being told to you is the truth. And that makes everything doubly hard, because we have no real way of verifying anything. The only thing we know is that rules govern the island, and more likely than not Jacob made up the rules.
One of the rules is candidates can't be killed by Smokie--most extreme case in point if Nikki (of Nikki and Paulo fame); she was not killed by Smokie in the form of the Medusa spider, but only paralyzed. Instead she was killed when Sawyer and others buried her alive.
On this point, the limited number of candidates implies they'd have to kill each other somehow. (At one point Locke nearly killed Hurley, when Locke threw the knife in the jungle and it hit Hurley's canteen).
Fred I will answer that more fully next time I'm on, but for now check out what I said at May 15, 2010 9:53 AM.
I'm off to bed.
With the backgammon and the senet board, I've been thinking that the game is the main structure of what's going on.
But maybe it's really the long con.
I mean, really long.
Gracie: TextEdit is just a non-fancy typing application like Notepad, but for Mac. So basically, really similar to Word/WordPad/Notepad, no other differences!
RE: Ben
Remember Miles' words about what Jacob was thinking when he died, how he had been wrong about Ben and that he could still change.
@Fred/Gracie: RE: mother's words.
I go back to Occam's Razor. The idea is that if you question everything she says (that we don't know to be truth or lies) then you are left with a multitude more questions at a point in the show when you can't afford to have more questions.
Taking her words at face value, it actually (partially) answers questions, which is what the viewers and writers are looking for at this point.
Had this episode aired last years, or even at the beginning of the season, I would have agreed.
@Benny:I go back to Occam's Razor. The idea is that if you question everything she says (that we don't know to be truth or lies) then you are left with a multitude more questions at a point in the show when you can't afford to have more questions.
Ah, Benny, but I can afford to have a multitude of questions, even as the last second of the show ticks by. How brilliant it would be to think that LOST is unresolvable, or at least remains a mystery for future fans to return time and again to puzzle out what it all means.
For myself, personally, I am quite happy if the show does not precipitate into a single, undissolvable meaning. If I am willing to consider multiple readings of Dickens, or Shakespeare, or even the Bible, then why shouldn't I accept multiple readings of LOST? Certainly that's not the way television shows have ended in the past, but then LOST has managed to break a number of past standing patterns for television shows.
So we might say there are at least two types of fans/audience for LOST. Those, such as yourself who want the show to come down to some significant meaning which answers at least the big questions. The second sort of audience is like myself, able to tolerate unstable meanings and a boatload of questions remaining. By analogy, we are like two music lovers, one who wishes a composition to return to the tonic key, while another accepts dissonance and atonality.
Within this week and next, we'll see which way the writers of the show come down. While I suspect they'll satisfy many viewers with sufficient answers, they may do so in such a way that there remains some ambiguity in the answers (still yet, I do not think all the asnwers will be forthcoming, and we will be left with questions). I am hoping the writers are listening to Schoenberg, whiel you and so many others are hoping for Beethoven (great drama but that return).
@Fred: Those, such as yourself who want the show to come down to some significant meaning which answers at least the big questions.
That's where you got me wrong. Throughout this season I've argued that many questions will no be answered and that's what I'm looking for. But I'm also looking at how the show has been built and how it is culminating.
There is a difference between A] not answering questions; and B] asking new questions.
I'm part of a group who believes that some big questions will be answered, those the writers intended to be questions. But at the same time, they are not going to start asking new questions. Any 'new questions' you might have should be subcategories of pre-existing questions.
And that is consistent with my viewing of the last few episodes. Watching since at least The Last Recruit, I have personally not had any true new question. I've had definite answers, potential answers, dilemmatic answers and non answers.
The writers have said that the show will have a lot left unanswered, but that the overarching story will be resolved, and for a story to be resolved you need a beginning. That beginning has been said to be this episode.
If you ask questions about the 'Monther' and her history, and doubt what she said, then you are only asking what came before, doubting the beginning and preventing a clear resolution to the story, which we were guaranteed three years ago.
So, while I'm not looking for answers, I'm expecting a resolution, as I've been promised. Doubting the words and story form Across the Sea ultimately nullifies any resolution we might have in The End.
@Fred If I am willing to consider multiple readings of Dickens, or Shakespeare, or even the Bible, then why shouldn't I accept multiple readings of LOST?
You addressed it more to Benny, and I don't intended to speak on his behalf, but I can say that I have no issues with the concept of Lost ending with multiple readings/interpretations.
Heck, I was an English major; I have no problems debating various interpretations of films and novels and TV shows. Rather, I LOVE doing that!
But I feel like while the themes and meanings and character motivations of Lost can and should be open to interpretation (and I wouldn't want them NOT to be) I do believe that the PLOT of Lost shouldn't be open to interpretation.
I mean, for all the differing interpretations of Dickens and Shakespeare, at the end of the day, we still know the PLOT of their works. We know that a miserly Scrooge saw three ghosts which took him on a tour of the space-time continuum and in the end, he emerged a changed man. We know that Macbeth slew the King of Scotland, took the throne, and was then ousted himself, etc.
As it stands (and hopefully the final episodes will clarify this some) there is still some basic plot elements of Lost that remain unknown.
The issue of whether or not MiB became Smokey or Smokey was released and took MiB's form isn't, to me, one of meaning/theme/motivation, but one of plot. What the scene of Jacob throwing his brother into the cave and Smokey emerging MEANS doesn't need to be spelled out, but I feel like what HAPPENED in that scene does.
My problem isn't that we don't know what it means; my problem is that we don't even know what really happened.
@Teebore: I posted an answer to your last response on the thread concerning MiB and Smokie, Nikki recently posted.
Your point about "meaning" versus plot is well taken. But we should also be aware how plot is tied very much to narration. The undecidability of narrative events may very much undermine the assurance we hold in plotted events. You wrote:
My problem isn't that we don't know what it means; my problem is that we don't even know what really happened.
You will see I am very much with you on this point: we don't know what really happened. And as I discuss in the other thread (MiB = Smokie?) I discuss whether or not Darlton are playing with our expectations of plot. I believe they have been, and this has made things even more difficult for viewers to ascertain what is really going on.
Heck, Vozzek has even questioned whether Kate (off island) even had Aaron with her, or that Aaron was just a projection of Kate's own wishes. If that is really the case, how can any of us really grasp the plot of the story. Some will believe Aaron was off island with Kate, while others will assume not.
One final point, I do believe LOST offers up multiple meanings for events. But for many audience members the assumption of multiple meanings is anathema. Some viewers work with not only one plot outline, but one interpretive meaning. The great thing about LOST is that that works just as well.
@Fred: I discuss whether or not Darlton are playing with our expectations of plot. I believe they have been, and this has made things even more difficult for viewers to ascertain what is really going on.
As you'll see in my response, I don't believe they've been playing with our expectation of plot. Or, at least, they weren't until season six began to unfold.
I suppose it's a matter of interpretation. ;)
One final point, I do believe LOST offers up multiple meanings for events. But for many audience members the assumption of multiple meanings is anathema. Some viewers work with not only one plot outline, but one interpretive meaning. The great thing about LOST is that that works just as well.
I certainly share your belief that Lost offers up multiple meanings for events, and I have no problem with this. I'd probably have a problem if Lost didn't. And I'm not someone who needs one interpretive meaning, like my friend I mentioned in the other thread. I wholeheartedly embrace the notion of multiple meanings and interpretations.
I do, however, believe the show's PLOT should only have one meaning.
In the other thread you mentioned Sherlock Holmes, and I recently brought him up during a discussion similar to this on my own blog.
The charm of a good Holmes story, I argued, was in both the presence of Holmes himself (one of fiction's great characters) and in the puzzling out of the whodunit elements of the story, followed by the revelation of, well, who dun it.
While I love Holmes' character, and believe there should be many interpretive meanings regarding how Holmes feels about the events of the story, or what the author intended the audience to take away from the story in terms of social or political commentary, I would not love very many Sherlock Holmes stories if we never found out who did it in the end, if we never found out how our deductions matched those of Holmes.
As Lost comes to a close (and there's still two episodes left) it's beginning to seem, to me, like a Holmes story where we'll never discover the culprit and how Holmes figured it all out.
For me, despite all the interpretive meaning ripe for debate, that just doesn't make for a very satisfying story.
Especially when, up until very recently, Lost seemed to be presented to its audience as a very traditional whodunit with a delightful overabundance of well-crated characters and opportunities for interpretation of meaning, theme and motivation by its audience.
Now it's like we're suddenly being told "no, you've been wrong for five seasons: the plot doesn't matter. And all those times we told you, explicitly or implicitly, it did? Yeah, we were either lying, or we've suddenly changed our minds".
Othermother: a woman caring for children who are not biologically her own.
I believe McGoohan and Markstein never answered all the questions and "The Prisoner" DVDs are still selling 40 years later.
@Gracie:
It is true that the island, the light, the water, etc. are all underwater in the sideways story...that being the operative condition. I don't think, however, that when everything is finally resolved the island et al. will still be underwater...I think that scenario is a possibility, but is unlikely to prove to be the final outcome. I have good reasons for this, and if you want a tedious explanation of how quantum mechanics and 'possibility travel' play into this as well as how these things are usually viewed in science fiction, I'd be happy to provide it. But the bottom line is that I do not believe that the island is underwater in the reality that really matters here.
So whatever it is that is so important about that light, I think it is still around...but we'll see, won't we? And we may also get a view of what happens if, in fact, it is really gone. That will be interesting, but not, I think, pretty.
@ Teebore, Fred, Benny:
I'm with all of you, I think (correct me if I am wrong)...I want the plot resolved in some meaningful way, but also want enough elements left open so that there is plenty of basis for future stories.
But Teebore, I DO think we will get a satisfying resolution of this particular story arc's plot. Otherwise, you are correct that they have either been lying to us, or have changed their minds. And I truly hope this is not the case.
@Fred who said: "@Gracie:I think that Jacob didn't think of "Ben as being of no real consequence". I just don't think Jacob really "thought" of Ben at all. You've hit on a very important point here. MiB says to Jacob that people are just means to an end. In other words, con them so you can get your goal, much as Sawyer did in his life. For so long we've seen Jacob as this good guy. And yet, there is nothing charitable in him........So which is worse: (a) to be conned by MiB, or (b) to be forced into a no win situation by Jacob? We used to see these two figures as diametrical opposites: good versus evil. Now we realize their just both indifferent to humanity. One sees humanity close up; the other from a distance."
Me: Every word you say in this wonderful paragraph is true, but none so much as your first line. I refer again to my post at May 15, 2010 9:53 AM. For all intents and purposes, neither of them is good, and neither is evil. Both can "justify" their actions based on the situation they were put into at that time, both think they are in the right (good), and in a way, they both are (and aren't). Conversely, each of them thinks the other is evil (and isn't) depending on whose pair of shoes you're wearing. (I have not been convinced that Jacob is good since he touched everyone we saw and knew to be getting on that plane. If he were truly good, he would have led these people away from the plane, which he could not do.) I can see why Jacob feels as he does about MIB, but never so much as after he sees what he himself did to MIB. And I can see why MIB thinks he must beat Jacob with a loophole. (The final answer to this, if there is one, will lie in what is being protected. If it's something that meant a great deal to Mom and the rest of the world at or during that time, but doesn't today, we have a whole new outlook. If it's importance is vital to humanity at all times, well, it will kind of give Jacob a much needed leg to stand on IMHO.) If I had a disagreement at all, it would be where you say that one sees humanity close up. Jacob's relationship with Ilana has never been explained, but it appears that there is a relationship there of some kind. But maybe that's what we were supposed to think. I say that because if Jacob actually saw the effects he had on people's lives, including Ilana's, he would have to rethink the way he goes about recruiting. But it doesn't appear that he even cares what is happening in your life right before he pulls the rug out from under you. No feelings at all whatsoever. How close could he have been to Ilana to ask her to do something which I believe he knew would ultimately lead to her death? It's in the eye of the beholder, but where evil is concerned, I can't say one has an edge over the other. In your first sentence you use the word "con". Forever ago, long after I had been subjected to all the games involved in this show, and after seeing how all the cons came together, I wondered if the whole show could be in any sense just one great big con? The audience is the mark. But because I couldn't figure out who the writer's wanted us to think was running the con, and I never got much beyond that basic thought. But every time I see the word "con", I have to stop and rethink it all again. At this point it would not surprise me, if at the end, I learned I had been conned in some way.
Fred also said: "@Gracie: And I am having more problems than most of the bloggers (it appears) believing that everything dear old mum said should be written in stone. I find myself questioning EVERYTHING she said because she proved herself to be a liar.
Right on! Mother said she would make it the brothers could not harm each other. Now we think maybe Jacob killed his brother (some still believe Smokie possesses MiB's soul). But in a story in which promises are regularly broken, people constantly lie, why should we as the audience believe some character's claims just because she is dressed in 2,000 year old clothes! So far almost nobody has told the truth on this island--so why begin now. And if you want to fall for a con, then just believe what is being told to you is the truth. And that makes everything doubly hard, because we have no real way of verifying anything. The only thing we know is that rules govern the island, and more likely than not Jacob made up the rules. One of the rules is candidates can't be killed by Smokie--most extreme case in point if Nikki (of Nikki and Paulo fame); she was not killed by Smokie in the form of the Medusa spider, but only paralyzed. Instead she was killed when Sawyer and others buried her alive. On this point, the limited number of candidates implies they'd have to kill each other somehow. (At one point Locke nearly killed Hurley, when Locke threw the knife in the jungle and it hit Hurley's canteen).
Wow! Thank you. (There's that "con" word again!) Mother did in fact say they could not hurt each other. She made it sound like she had fixed it so that they were not physically able to do such a thing. Then we see Jacob is beating on his brother TWICE, which alone makes what Mom said questionable. I DO think for all intents Jacob killed his brother by pushing him into the stream. Thereafter, whether he died from drowning, hitting his head, or from something Smokie did to him, doesn't matter. The physical form that was MIB still died. BUT the part of him that lived within the body, the essence of him, including his memory and ability to think and reason, was sucked out of him and lives on within the Smoke Monster and MIB knows this, making it a fate worse than death. He knows what has happened to him since he "died" and knows what "he" has done. (The Smoke Monster must have the ability to do this, otherwise it would have no way of attaining the knowledge that it gets when it takes over a body such as all it knows about Locke, Locke's past, Locke's way of looking at things etc. Would Locke have still been suicidal if he'd known what was to happen to his body? Methinks not.) I will allow that if there's another way for Smokie to attain such knowledge that we don't know about yet, this could be all wrong and MIB simply died. But somehow the knowledge WAS attained, and it would have to be explained how Smokie could know what it came to know.
(cont.)
Cont.
Everyone in this story has lied, some several times over, including our beloved Hurley. But the biggest lies of the whole story will be the lies that Jacob has learned over time that his mother told him. Jacob would never have had any way to verify anything she ever said except through trial and error, and his own naivete would keep him buried in a deeper hole. And I agree that the current rules governing the island are Jacob's rules, as well as I agree that whatever those rules are, MOST of them are involved in the playing of a game. The Candidates should in fact be safe, killable only by each other, unless they can be picked off by someone like Ben. I said in an earlier post that if he's trying to play both sides, I would not be surprised. Maybe he is using the remaining Candidates and the security they offer in an attempt to pick off Widmore so he (Ben) can again claim the island. If so, this time there would be no Jacob, and the island would truly be Ben's. That only leads me further into my belief that it will appear everything is heading straight for Jack until life steps in and makes a mess of Jacob's plan. Just as it happened to him, Jacob will be forced into a secondary postition with little time to spare. There's my Candidate.
redeem147 said: "With the backgammon and the senet board, I've been thinking that the game is the main structure of what's going on. But maybe it's really the long con. I mean, really long."
That's exactly what I mean about the word "con". Everyone, including me, seems to be leaning towards a game. Could it be instead, a long con? If so, then you can remove everything that you think you know to be true about this island because the con itself would have to be run by ....who? Ben and Widmore? Ben, Widmore and Richard? Who would be running it, and to what end? Cons are usually run to make money, and we know Widmore likes money. But what does he get back, and from whom, if he is part of a long con? See?
Because there are less questions if you believe the island to be a game, that's the way I've ended up going. But the con, if there is one, is still very much alive and a real possibility! It's just harder to see the "whos" and "what" they hope to achieve.
Benny said: "Gracie: TextEdit is just a non-fancy typing application like Notepad, but for Mac. So basically, really similar to Word/WordPad/Notepad, no other differences!
RE: Ben
Remember Miles' words about what Jacob was thinking when he died, how he had been wrong about Ben and that he could still change.
@Fred/Gracie: RE: mother's words.
I go back to Occam's Razor. The idea is that if you question everything she says (that we don't know to be truth or lies) then you are left with a multitude more questions at a point in the show when you can't afford to have more questions.
Taking her words at face value, it actually (partially) answers questions, which is what the viewers and writers are looking for at this point.
Had this episode aired last years, or even at the beginning of the season, I would have agreed.
Thanks for the TextEdit info. With WordPad, Notepad, and WordPerfect, I don't think that's something that I need. :) Info is always nice though.
Going with this theory, Jacob did always believe that Ben could change or change his mind. The problem with that is that Jacob never cared until he was "under the knife" to find out exactly what Ben thought about things. He left Ben to swing in the wind alone and completely unaided. Apparently Ben had sought an audience with Jacob several times but was never granted one, so Jacob just always "assumed" that Ben would be there. He picked a really bad time to find out he was wrong if you ask me, and with stakes this high, that was a major fubar.
Re: Mom's words. WE don't have to assume to the degree that you think that Jacob no longer knows where she lied. We can assume that maybe by this point in time he knows exactly where she lied, and his actions that follow are a result of what he has learned to be what is actually the truth. When she passed off the cup and incantation, I think he would have gained a great deal of her knowledge. His original knowledge, for one example was, "She said we could not hurt each other, yet I just pounded his face in, and caused red goop to come out, and my hand hurts like hell!" Hello? That right there should tell HIM something. To some degree, he would know then where she had lied, to what extent, and why. So, I still have only my three questions. I guess what I'm saying is that if I were Jacob, I would not believe a word she had ever told me over the course of our time together leading me to question all of it. Since I'm not Jacob, I can only hope he's learned a few things, from her with the incantation, and on his own as a direct result of his own actions. Lucky for me, Occam's Razor doesn't play in it at all. My number of questions has gone up by exactly zero. I had three questions yesterday, and still have three today. Whew! LOL
That's it for me tonight!
Claudia: How did you get here?
Mother: The same way you got here. By accident.
So did Mother come to the "Island" by accident....or with the "Island" by accident.
Mother: Jacob doesn't know how to lie. He's not like you.
Don't people instinctively know how to lie? Don't they have to be taught how to tell the truth?
The narrative shows Claudia delivering twins yet Claudia asks "May I see him?"
Anthuriums surround the "Light Cave" and are used to frame only BiB. We have seen the red flowers before.
Yemi and Eko in the "garden"
David and Hurley on the way to the cliffs
Ben at the Orchid station and in his painting at his "Otherville" home (His mother??)
So what are the tapestries made from...boar's hair?
Original senet game seemed to be 3 white vs 3 black. Significant?
Mother: They come, they fight, they destroy, they corrupt.. and it always ends the same. Just how long has Mother been at this?
This would seem to be the first conversation Mother has had with the Jacob and BiB about men, so how do they know what men are when they first see them?
If Smokie is indeed MiB and he doesn't seem to run on rails as per some past theories why does he seem to have problems with banyans. Is it the spiritual aspects of the banyan (home of spirits)?
Is Claudia's bracelet an oroborous (symbol of rebirth)?
"Dead" Claudia seems to still be wearing it.
Not-Locke, Sawyer/Ford, Desmond seem to be able to see the "apparition" of young Jacob.
Young Jacob cannot see "dead" Claudia and Richard cannot see young Jacob????
MiB: I spent 30 years searching for that place you brought me as a child--that...waterfall with that beautiful light. I've walked this island from end to end, not once coming close to finding it. But, then I began to think-what if the light underneath the island--what if I could get to it fomr someplace else? Figuring out how to reach it took a very long time.
Close to finding it??? Sounds like allegory territory to me. THE LIGHT.. the quantum cosmic consciousness that we are all searching for?
Sea turtle continuity...Mother and BiB on the beach talking senet?
@Variabull - Don't people instinctively know how to lie? Don't they have to be taught how to tell the truth?
You know, it's interesting; it's not that they know how to lie, it's that one of the first things humans want to do (besides eat and breathe, etc...) is please their parents. So, they learn to lie to get what they want (approval) and avoid punishment. We all start out telling the truth: "You're FAT and you smell bad!" says the (completely honest) 3 year old to the nice old lady. We teach them that lying is better sometimes; we teach them to lie just by punishing for bad behavior. It's a Catch-22. Then we try to drill in how 'good' it is to tell the truth - even though it sucks to get in trouble and small kids care little about morals.
Everyone lies (I do love it Nana, really! Mmm, delicious!)- if you don't lie, you're a sociopath and most likely are a danger to society.
@Benny and Fred and your comments as they come together at May 17, 2010 12:41 PM: I have to believe that when the writer's first sat down and started writing this story, they saw a beginning and an ending that they wanted for it. To be able to believe in any ending, I have to hold onto my belief that they had one regardless of who or how many people disagree with me, because.....
To all of those who believe the writer's have been flying by the seat of their pants all this time and did not know at the beginning where this would go: I believe in that premise only to this extent: When you offer a show to network TV, you have to have a basic story line that you are selling. IF they pick you up, the original agreement might be for the first season, and we'll go from there. But everyone knows that ratings are what keeps you there. So even within the first Season, if the writer's didn't get the ratings, they could have been dropped by the network at any given time. Then the story stops right there. (For us that means this week you have Lost. Next week you discover it's been dropped completely be ABC.) They were not. The story went on. After three years, they had a religious experience with the audience, and the ratings were at the top. Plus there were Emmy nominations. (Being a newbie, I don't know exactly where the Emmy's came into play, so just work with me on that.) At that time, the three year mark, TPTB decided there would be only three more years. They knew THEN where they had to go, how they had to get there, and what they needed to do to wrap it all up. They also knew that at this point, it's a safe bet that if you keep your story moving along and holding your ratings, you're not going to get dropped.
Unlike other shows, this show has had a multitude of story lines all going on at one time. But I believe to the writer's and to the production team, there was basically only one story. Everything else was a story within the story. Jack's story was not THE story, but a smaller story within the big one. I have to believe that when the show wraps up on the 23rd they will have finished the story that they set out to tell.
If I'm wrong, then everything above and everything I've ever believed about this show will have been proven wrong, and my own personal devastation will know no boundaries. If I'm right, then that story, the original story, will be the story that had an beginning, moved along a story line, and came to The End. But, and this is big, I also believe that even if you did see it the first time around, you can watch the whole thing again, and walk away with more answers than you had the first time if you've already seen it, or with a different ending in mind if you've never seen it before. In other words, every time you see it, when it ends, it will have a different meaning for you, and that is individual. Each person will get something out of it that will change upon further viewing. Yes, Fred, I also believe the answers will be ambiguous. :)
That's all the further I've gotten with the comments, and following another re-watch, I hope to have time to toss some other things out to give people an opportunity to reply if they wish. Penny for your thoughts sort of thing.
Fred: Where you start out a paragraph saying, "For myself, personally", I'd like to toss out something else to chew on. Most times a book is taken and turned into a movie or TV show. MOST of the time the book far exceeds the show because the book gives a lot more detail, and it's up to you to let your imagination run wild for the visuals. People disagree because they prefer the visuals or just don't like to read. I would love it if the writer's finished up Lost, and then gave us a Lost book. That would entail the same story, but with more detail in every area. Maybe there would be a few more concrete answers, but the ending would still be open to interpretation in most areas. Am I the only one who would buy that? I don't think so. Hardly!
Food for thought, but not Need To Knows:
Where Mom refers to the light, she calls it the Heart of the Island. Does anyone interpret that two different ways? The heart of the island does NOT necessarily have to be the heart of the world, right? There is an implication when she's discussing the whole thing that it could be, or she thinks it is, but then she says, "Life, Death, Rebirth, (something), the Heart of the Island. Could the heart of the island possibly be something that is only important to the island? We know the whole life and death thing is screwy on the island, and rebirth is prohibited by something we don't know about yet. What about the heart of the island being taken out of context too? Keeping in mind that currently the heart of the island is underwater. (In a particularly well known movie, the heart of the ocean was a necklace. I hope there's more significance to this than that!)
In this same area, Mom says that if the light goes out here, it goes out everywhere. She has spent the previous years telling these boys that there is no "everywhere". THIS is all there is. The island is the beginning and the end of the road. So could she mean that if the light goes out here at this particular place, it will go out all over the island? Is that an interpretation that anyone thought of?
On two separate occasions, BIB/MIB is assaulted by Jacob. At no time does he ever raise a hand to ward off a blow much less try to actually defend himself. It appears as though he's not allowed (?) to defend himself. This has a sort of following for me when he quietly sneaks up behind Mom and stabs her in the back as though he knows that if she tried to stop him, he could not defend himself against her almost like he's not allowed to. The final time he is confronted by Jacob, MIB raises an arm and says, " Wait." but there is no defense at all. Why is that? The reason I ask is because I wondered if in the final set-up, where we already know the body of Locke is on one side, does the person on either side have to be incapable of offering a defense? Locke has been shown to be capable. In an argument with Jack, I think each side would be able to be defensive if they are "allowed" to be. Kate: each side is able. Sawyer: each side is able. Hurley? I don't know if I've ever seen Hurley raise his hands in anger to anyone to strike, or to strike back, and would need clarification on this point, but does anyone even think that matters? If not, why didn't MIB offer some defense? With the work it appears he was doing in the village, he should have been able to stomp all over Jacob.
Regarding free will and choice: Mom tells Jacob that she sees now that it was always supposed to be him, and that he has to replace her because he doesn't really have a choice. Well, yeah, as I see it, he had a choice. He definitely had a choice, but he didn't want to leave the island anyway, so why not? Then I think either she told him something to push it over the edge, or he already knew what the stakes were, and saw that although he DID have a choice, it would be incredibly selfish to not look after this light. So although he did have a choice, he elected to follow Mom. Did anyone else catch that? Does it matter?
Did you notice the drawings from the game board (old "bakcgammon")? They are the same that we can find in Ireland (see Newgrange). And when we saw that light, its impossible not to remeber the beginning of Wagner's ring: the "Rheingold". A light so beautiful and so powerful that needed to be protected afianst the men that want to transform it in a Ring (donkey wheel... lol) and obtain supreme power.
Post a Comment